Whether writing to your legislator or commenting on a proposal, personal stories carry much more weight than an obvious copy-paste job. These take time, and that's what this page is here for! Think about why the ability to sustainably bolt canyons in the US is important to you. Choose some starter language below that's most relevant to you (mix and match for an even more powerful statement!), and wrap your personal story around that starter language. Then click the link and submit your comments. 

My first canyon was [name] in Zion National Park. [describe the experience, and how it impacted you] For decades, National Parks have partnered with canyoneers to establish safe, sustainable access to these incredibly special places. In places like Zion, thoughtful bolting has reduced the impact on the resource, and made it an invaluable entry point to the sport for an estimated 25% of American canyoneers. Additionally, the low technical barrier to Zion canyons creates opportunities for peer leadership, allowing non-canyoneers to become immersed in these special places without paying for a guide. The park has successfully managed these canyons for decades through an effective permitting process, and in partnership with the canyoning community. Adding bureaucratic restrictions to park managers is unnecessary. Language that promotes the removal of existing bolts in absence of a costly MRA is in contradiction to the purposes of wilderness: the removal of bolts will lead to the degradation of these canyons, and close the door to thousands of people every year who seek to be immersed in these spectacular places.

The canyoning community is an inclusive community that prioritizes empowering individuals and creating a sense of team. A well-bolted technical canyon reduces the need to be an elite athlete or a "seasoned outdoor explorer" to be an asset on a team. Bolted anchors allow a much broader group of outdoor enthusiasts, including those who are brand new to the outdoors, to not only experience full immersion in a remote place, but also experience them as a valued teammate through technical skill that is not reliant on having years of outdoor experience or on being the fastest or strongest. The USFS Minimum Requirements Decision Guide lists as its policy objectives: Protect and perpetuate wilderness character and public values including, but not limited to, opportunities for scientific study, education, solitude, physical and mental challenge and stimulation, inspiration, and primitive recreation experiences. Fixed anchors in a canyon promote these values in an equitable way, allowing more of the public to benefit from these stated objectives. 

Responsibly placed anchors make safe access to special places possible. Many people lack the time or access to training to travel through technical terrain independently. A guided canyoning experience not only allows people to experience special places the wouldn’t otherwise have access to, but it builds confidence, encourages teamwork, and promotes a sense of play, all of which are critical for adult mental health. As guides/educators, when we take untrained individuals into a canyon, well-placed fixed anchors are what allow us to provide a transformative experience in nature for our participants, while effectively managing the objective risks of the environment. (For guides/educators: Insert trip advisor comments)

In many cases, bolts are the most sustainable option - even more sustainable than fully removable anchors. Well-traveled destinations without fixed anchors experience tree damage and erosion due to high traffic using the only natural anchors available. Webbing and other soft goods deteriorate and leave microplastics in the environment. Ultimately, they wash into the water course. Bolts, on the other hand, can be placed on a durable rock surface that keeps impact away from fragile surfaces. They also create less of an eyesore than webbing or damaged natural resources. Over time, high-travel canyons without bolted anchors experience more lasting damage to the environment than those with bolted anchors.

In aquatic canyons, teams must prioritize managing the risks of water hazards. This means that anchor managers must be stationed at the edge of a drop so that they can communicate with the rappeller to ensure the rope is set with precision, and so that they can help facilitate any problem-solving. Additionally, anchors must be placed so that the fall line avoids any major aquatic hazards. These safety objectives should be considered the minimum safety requirements for the public to experience aquatic canyons in wilderness and non-wilderness alike.

The canyoning community in the US is very connected, and our approach to canyon travel (and all off-trail travel) is centered on minimizing human impacts on the resource. The community engages in ongoing conversation about ways to continue to protect the primitive nature of our canyons, and how to adjust our strategies so that they are appropriate for the environment. High-travel canyons - those that have easy access or low technical barriers - need special considerations. For example, 6-8 parties a year using a retrievable anchor around a tree will likely retain the wilderness character. But 6-8 parties a week during peak season using a retrievable anchor around that same tree will erode the roots as they access the tree, and strip the bark as they pull the anchor to retrieve it. For a high travel canyon, bolts can greatly reduce the impact by keeping all travel on durable surfaces. This is just one example to illustrate the importance of land managers working with canyoneers who can inform decisions in the best interest of the wilderness purposes. National guidance prohibiting bolts presupposes that the agency leaders are experts in whether bolts achieve the purposes of the Wilderness Act, and that a one-size-fits-all approach will meet the same goals for a huge diversity of land. It fails to allow room for public experts to support the decision.

It's no secret that our public lands are underfunded. Most Forest Service Districts and National Parks lack the staffing needed to respond to basic permit requests, much less conduct a NEPA process. Requiring an MRA for any bolts in wilderness, including existing bolts, is irresponsible without identifying a dedicated fund to provide the resources for this. This unfunded mandate will surely lead to bolting permit moratoriums, an absurd outcome that wholly fails to meet the stated purposes of the Wilderness Act.